854 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXV. No. 648 



the same way. Some of us claim to be 

 civilized and yet find high pleasure and 

 recreation in hunting, killing, maiming and 

 torturing defenseless animals, although we 

 go on criticizing the Spaniards who enjoy 

 the gore of a bull-fight. And even those 

 of us who admit the savage cruelty of hunt- 

 ing and kindred sports do not hesitate to 

 elevate, propagate and degenerate certain 

 species of domestic animals with the ex- 

 press purpose of killing them for food. 

 We do not see anything inconsistent in the 

 fact that, scientific though we are, and 

 while we talk snobbishly of our refined 

 taste, we are much less particular than 

 plant-eating animals, and we keep feeding 

 on corpses of fellow creatures. 



We call ourselves scientists because we 

 believe in the laws of nature. In our 

 studies and our research work we have 

 never-ending opportunities for admiring 

 the marvelous harmony of nature, the in- 

 variable laws of God. Yet when we hold 

 our annual banquet of scientists we fail to 

 see that we blaspheme the God of law and 

 order and deny the immutability of his 

 laws by asking him in prayer (and in this 

 similar to savages) to disturb these eternal 

 laws of nature so as to grant us some petty 

 favors, forgetting that we are merely in- 

 significant little dots in the immensity of 

 the universe. 



Let me conclude this essay by repeating 

 the main points mentioned therein : 



If specialization may be advantageous 

 for increasing our productiveness in a 

 given field of activity, over-specialization, 

 on the other hand, may develop one-sided- 

 ness; it may stunt our gro-wth as men and 

 citizens ; even for persons engaged in scien- 

 tific pursuits it may render impossible the 

 attainment of true and general philosophic 

 conceptions. 



If I have succeeded in convincing some 

 of us that over-specialization does not bring 

 forth the very best there is in us, if I have 



contributed ever so little to keep us aloof 

 from the life of dizzy automatic machines, 

 if I have succeeded even in the smallest 

 degree in stimulating you to nobler en- 

 deavors, then I shall indeed feel very amply 

 rewarded by your kind attention. 



L. H. Baekeland 



SCIENTIFIC BOOKS 

 The Syllogistic Philosophy or Prolegomena to 



Science. By Fraucis Ellingwood Abbot, 



Ph.D. Boston: Little, Brown & Co. 1906. 



2 vols. Pp. xiv -t- 317 ; vi + 376. 



These voliiines are the philosophical testa- 

 ment of their author (d. 1903), whose previous 

 works—' Scientific Theism ' (1883), ' The Way 

 out of Agnosticism ' (1890), and contribu- 

 tions to 'The Index' (1870-80), of which he 

 was editor — constitute preliminary surveys. 

 The work has been in preparation more or 

 less since 1859 (cf. ii., 291), and was reduced 

 to its present form in the decade 1893-1903. 

 In his pathetic preface and valedictory words. 

 Dr. Abbot states his purpose and expectations 

 with no uncertain sound. He puts in a claim 

 to have superseded all previous thinkers, to be 

 enrolled with the greatest classics. In so do- 

 ing, he remembered, doubtless, that he waa 

 also courting the stringent criticism which 

 men accord to the classics only. 



If at last it shall receive sober, just and intel- 

 ligent appreciation, I believe it will be found to 

 have done for philosophy what was done for bot- 

 any in transition from the artificial Linnsean 

 classification to the natural system of classification 

 by total organic and genetic relationship — a revo- 

 lution never to be reversed; and to give to ethical 

 and free religion what it has never yet had, a basis 

 in scientific reason (I., xi). My work of forty- 

 four years is done, and I commit its destinies to 

 the Master of Life, whom I have resolutely but 

 reverently sought to know by using the free reason 

 which is his supreme gift to man (II., 296). 



In the circumstances, and face to face with 

 Dr. Abbot's ex cathedra earnestness, criticism 

 becomes an ungrateful task. One can only 

 say, to begin with, that whether these tre- 

 mendous expectations are to be justified time 

 alone can tell. But after a careful and sym- 

 pathetic perusal of the contents, I feel com- 



